Archived material Access restricted Article
Rantburg

Today's Front Page   View All of Wed 06/02/2010 View Tue 06/01/2010 View Mon 05/31/2010 View Sun 05/30/2010 View Sat 05/29/2010 View Fri 05/28/2010 View Thu 05/27/2010
1
2010-06-02 Science & Technology
Aboard the USS Freedom
Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.
Posted by GolfBravoUSMC 2010-06-02 15:37|| || Front Page|| [3 views ]  Top

#1 It didn't look like it had an ability to deal with anti-ship missiles. That seems like an oversight.
Posted by Bright Pebbles 2010-06-02 16:05||   2010-06-02 16:05|| Front Page Top

#2 It's supposed to carry a launcher for Rolling Airframe Missile antimissiles, and a decoy launcher. Also, the gun could be used, but I've read stuff saying the fire control radar might not be good enough for antimissile/aircraft use.
Posted by Thing From Snowy Mountain 2010-06-02 16:11||   2010-06-02 16:11|| Front Page Top

#3 LCS doesn't have any anti-ship missiles and none are planned. Any anti-ship missile capability will have to reside in the 2 Seahawk helicopters. As Snowy mentioned, it does have some anti-ship cruise missile defenses w/ RAM, but no offensive punch. It is supposed to be able to carry a mission module with modified anti-tank missiles (NLOS) to take out speedboats and such. Too bad the Army canceled it for nonperformance and stuck the Navy w/ 100% of future development bills.

Nor does it have any air defenses greater than 5 miles range. There are better armed patrol boats that are 1/10th the size of LCS that are a hell of a lot more flexible in the "Littoral" combat environment than a $500 million, 3,000 ton aluminum (read flammable) monstrosity. LCS might not be able to fight worth a damn, but it sure can deliver meals to ungrateful Somalis in 30 minutes or less.
Posted by ed 2010-06-02 17:16||   2010-06-02 17:16|| Front Page Top

#4 Closeup still shots

Posted by GolfBravoUSMC 2010-06-02 17:55||   2010-06-02 17:55|| Front Page Top

#5 I don't particularly care much for the name. It sounds like the name of a ship which is sunk, starting a war.

I would prefer the "USS C.B. Momsen".
Posted by  Anonymoose 2010-06-02 19:16||   2010-06-02 19:16|| Front Page Top

#6 IF you wanted to equip it with better missiles you could attach vertical launcher modules for ESSMs to the side of the hangar or the roof of the hanger. It's a modular system.

I do get the impression, however, they needed to spend a little less money on those last 5 knots of speed and a little more on a decent radar.
Posted by Thing From Snowy Mountain 2010-06-02 19:56||   2010-06-02 19:56|| Front Page Top

#7 This class is a loser. To find out why, read this site.
Posted by Nimble Spemble 2010-06-02 20:56||   2010-06-02 20:56|| Front Page Top

#8 Aluminum hull and superstructure should make a good Purple Heart Box.
Posted by Alaska Paul 2010-06-02 21:28||   2010-06-02 21:28|| Front Page Top

23:53 gorb
23:35 gorb
23:35 Redneck Jim
23:30 M. Murcek
23:27 Redneck Jim
23:26 JosephMendiola
23:22 JosephMendiola
23:18 JosephMendiola
23:11 crosspatch
23:10 crosspatch
23:06 gorb
23:01 OldSpook
22:33 European Conservative
22:30 M. Murcek
22:30 phil_b
22:24 phil_b
22:19 JosephMendiola
22:08 Frank G
22:05 M. Murcek
22:03 M. Murcek
22:02 JosephMendiola
21:59 trailing wife
21:53 JosephMendiola
21:49 lord garth









Paypal:
Google
Search WWW Search rantburg.com